SENTHILKUMAR Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition to suspend the sentence imposed against him in judgment dtd. 23/2/2023 made in S.C.No.104 of 2004 on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Iranial, Kanyakumari District and to enlarge him on bail till the disposal of the Criminal Appeal.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case:

(3.) To prove the charge, the prosecution examined 6 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.6 and marked 8 exhibits as Ex.P1 to Ex.P8. Two material object were marked as M.O.1 and M.O.2. On the defence side, no witness was examined and no exhibit was marked. After considering both sides evidences and both side arguments, the Trial Court has found the petitioner/Accused No.2 and another accused guilty for the offence under Ss. 341 and 307 r/w 34 of IPC and convicted and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month each and to pay a fine of Rs.100.00 each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one week each for the offence under Sec. 341 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years each and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000.00 each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year each for the offence under Sec. 307 r/w 34 of IPC by passing impugned judgment dtd. 23/2/2023.